Apple Stock Options Fallout Continues

[whatever]

I have issues with democracy and capitalism and organized religion, too 8)

Democracy is just plain wretched. "Let's do whatever the greatest number of people want to do!" Bright ****ing idea. The majority of people eat at McDonald's, have no interest in reforming the two-party system, believe in God, and so forth. This means that the minority is completely at the mercy of the majority -- an example being that homosexuals are not allowed to be legally married.

Capitalism is the pits. "Let's do whatever makes a profit!" Crime skyrockets. A black market proliferates, with legality of the traded material often hinging on monetary interests rather than objective judgments -- witness marijuana vs. alcohol and cigarettes. Money (and therefore, profitable activities) determines public policy -- note frequency of American/European involvement in certain regions of the world compared with others. Conspicuous consumption (for example, a $15 000 purse or a $30 000 wedding ring) takes precedence over the lives that could be saved with that same amount of money. According to almost every ethical system (save that of Objectivism, the chief philosophical champion of capitalism), this is evil. Technological advancement is touted as a benefit. Meanwhile, global climate change seems inevitable, and is inevitable because financial concerns pre-empt societal concerns such as, you know, life.

And organized religion is the pits. Why? Don't ask me, God told me to say that. Perhaps you'd better pray for an explanation from Him directly. Here, kneel on this rice and flagellate yourself until He reveals Himself.

In general, I don't see anything wrong with communism. As Milton Friedman himself said, collectivism is very much in line with human nature. Free-market capitalism is as opposed to human nature as anything. No, really, he said that. So we work for the common good! Excellent. Within that constraint, we encourage competition. And we provide public healthcare, public education, and public suffrage so that each individual is provided with an equal footing for success in the public arena. People don't get exploited, everyone lives more or less comfortably, and their charitable donations to third-world countries are an order of magnitude greater than that of the US! In addition, their citizens are better-informed, vote more often, are more secularized, and, to top it off, are pretty damn foxy!

Jesus Christ! That sounds... like... Iceland or something!

Damn those Scandinavians!

Problem is, that it really doesn't work on the scale. Your statement of "everyone lives more or less comfortably" is the problem. In your utopia, who selects who lives "more" comfortable and who lives "less" comfortable? I know, I will. I will live more comfortable than you. But what does more and less mean. I'll solve that too, I'll define it you can sleep in a shack with just cold water and I'll live in a castle. Yeah, I'm starting to see things more your way and I'm starting to like it.

Please try to remember that Iceland as a population (307,261) smaller than Rhode Island (1,048,319). It's not exactly an Apple to Oranges comparisons. However, China (with over 20% of the worlds population) is a Communist country with all of those great things that you want, need I go on.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Let's try to keep this on-topic, shall we? I don't think we want this Apple-related thread kicked into the Politics and Religion forum, which is where it's headed if this hijack continues. Thanks.

 

[Apple Corps]

Apple closed at $80.87 today - not bad at all given all of the emphasis and doomsayers on the topic. I had to do a "gut check" early this morning as to how many of my shares to sell. It was "huevos grande" time and I decided to not sell any - Steve, Apple, share holders and consumers will get this behind them and Apple will be a better company going forward.

 

[jbernie]

Apple closed at $80.87 today - not bad at all given all of the emphasis and doomsayers on the topic. I had to do a "gut check" early this morning as to how many of my shares to sell. It was "huevos grande" time and I decided to not sell any - Steve, Apple, share holders and consumers will get this behind them and Apple will be a better company going forward.

A few nervous investors probably sold quick just in case. Long term view for Apple right now is, two ex-Execs are going to be facing some issues. It would not appear to be a systematic issue where all execs are doing it. Although Jobs appears to be getting some extra scrutiny over the options, I doubt he would get more than a fine if they do want to take him to court.

As this is an issue of share benifits for directors that won't affect Apple's bottom line I doubt the institutional investors will worry and that is the most important thing for Apple.

Of course, if there was to be any talk of Jobs being forced to resigned etc, then AAPL stock will catch the flu and there will be problems. I don't really see that happening, unless the Feds find something.

 

[steebu]

This really has nothing to do with the conversation, but I just wanted to point out the irony that Force Quit on Macs is Apple/Command–Option–Escape.

I could never look at my keyboard the same way again if Steve had to Force Quit over this Option scandal.

Sorry... I couldn't help myself.

 

[FrankBlack]

I understand your point, but in reality, we'd better hope not. One of these days he's going to retire. Apple does need to learn to get along without Steve Jobs, and the sooner the better. As an investor, I'm getting pretty weary of seeing the stock price gyrate madly every time a new rumor about Steve starts the rounds. Apple will never be a fully mature company until it can operate successfully without a god-head figure like Jobs.

I agree, and you make a valid point here. I'd like to think that Apple (the company) is very well aware that Steve Jobs, like all of us, is mortal and that he will not be the CEO forever. I would guess that a contingency plan is already in place. When Steve was recovering from surgery two years ago, Timothy Cook ran the company, and by all accounts, did fine.

Didn't investors get jittery a few years back, when the legendary General Electric CEO, Jack Welch, retire and hand over the keys to a younger, but carefully selected, replacement?

 

[IJ Reilly]

Didn't investors get jittery a few years back, when the legendary General Electric CEO, Jack Welch, retire and hand over the keys to a younger, but carefully selected, replacement?

Very much so, and Welch was one of the examples I was going to cite. He wasn't the founder of GE of course, but he did have a lot to do with creating the GE we know today. His transition to retirement was very carefully orchestrated by the company because they knew investors would be watching very closely for any signs of continuity loss. Steve Jobs is even a tougher person to replace if only because he's such a visible part of Apple's corporate personality. Is Steve mentoring his replacement? Is Steve even the kind of person to mentor anyone? I'm concerned, because I just don't see any signs of it.

 

[savanahrose]

Records purporting to show that a full board meeting had taken place to approve the remuneration were later falsified, the paper said. Jobs later returned the stock options.

Apple said in October that it had cleared Jobs of any wrongdoing related to option grants, blaming two other managers who it said had left the company.

Found this on yahoo tonight. He gave the stock options back, he is not guilty of anything. The two people who are guilty have already left the company. I assume this to be that Apple and Jobs are safe.

 

[mudger]

Records purporting to show that a full board meeting had taken place to approve the remuneration were later falsified, the paper said. Jobs later returned the stock options.

Apple said in October that it had cleared Jobs of any wrongdoing related to option grants, blaming two other managers who it said had left the company.

Found this on yahoo tonight. He gave the stock options back, he is not guilty of anything. The two people who are guilty have already left the company. I assume this to be that Apple and Jobs are safe.

you assume wrong. Jobs is still linked to the shares apparently, whether or not he gave them back. Guilty by association??

Sucks, I just switched to Apple and I love them, seriously.

 

[joeboy_45101]

I have issues with democracy and capitalism and organized religion, too 8)

Democracy is just plain wretched. "Let's do whatever the greatest number of people want to do!" Bright ****ing idea. The majority of people eat at McDonald's, have no interest in reforming the two-party system, believe in God, and so forth. This means that the minority is completely at the mercy of the majority -- an example being that homosexuals are not allowed to be legally married.

Majority rule is the only way to get things done. If you try to please EVERYBODY then nothing gets done, it's pure and simple. So, you try to satisfy the most people possible to maintain structure and keep things working. Democracy doesn't mean the majority is always going to support the right decisions or right ways of doing something, but it does mean that the most of society can benefit from the process.

Government itself is just groups of people coming together to solve problems that they normally could not solve on their own or with their own limited resources.

 

[AidenShaw]

you assume wrong. Jobs is still linked to the shares apparently, whether or not he gave them back. Guilty by association??

Sucks, I just switched to Apple and I love them, seriously.

Also, if you check out the press releases for the period in question - Jobs didn't simply return the illegal options.

They were underwater at the time, and they were exchanged for other stack grants that were a better deal. (At least, that was the "story" at the time.)

I'm sure that Ives will be able to design a stunning prison wardrobe for Steve.

(although, I've heard, looking good in prison isn't necessarily what you want to do)

 

[SiliconAddict]

That statement makes no sense.

Saving money, by outsourcing is the same as saving money by using machinery. What's the difference. Do you think it's wrong for manufacturers to use robotics instead of people?.

Short answer yes. People need to learn that in the long run you can't outsource everything or you could conceivably outsource every job at the company, right up to and including CEO, other then the shareholders. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Companies should take into consideration the human factor in the bottom line. Ahh but there is the beauty of the corporation. The very notion of morals goes right out the window with the large business entity where you single sole goal is to make money.
In the next 20 years we are going to find that literally every job out there can be replaced by robotics or machinery, up to and including the minimum wage burger flippers at McDonalds, and the janatorial staff in most buildings with the next generation of Roombas.
Where does it end? I think businesses, throughout all industries, somehow need to step back as a whole and ask just how far are we going to go with automation in the quest to make things cheaper. The reasoning this is happening is pretty straight forward. We live in the Walmart culture. Where everyone expects everything dirt cheap. There is a trickle "up" effect in all of this that really needs to stop, somehow.

 

[tmornini]

In the next 20 years we are going to find that literally every job out there can be replaced by robotics or machinery, up to and including the minimum wage burger flippers at McDonalds, and the janatorial staff in most buildings with the next generation of Roombas.
Where does it end?

I'm not sure where it ends, but I'll tell you where it started: 10 years old sewing on buttons in NYC in the 1800s.

Damn machinery put all those kids out of jobs. What a shame!

Get used to it. Technology means fewer and fewer people work menial jobs. It's a *good* thing.

 

[freediverdude]

Sounds to me like these two ex-execs were in on some kind of plot to "give" Jobs these options, and then later bring him down. But sounds like Jobs caught on to it and got these people to leave at the time. I imagine he has to be very careful of the people around him. I hope it doesn't end up bringing him down, it doesn't sound like it will at the moment. The Sarbanes-Oxley stuff has just gotten way out of hand though. I normally don't take the side of big business, lol, but large companies have had to add a whole Sarbanes-Oxley compliance department, a whole other level of bureaucracy to cope with this stuff. Not only is there internal and external auditing, but also a third Sarbanes-Oxley auditing as well. It's just bordering, in fact, not even bordering, it absolutely is absurd.

 

[kalisphoenix]

Problem is, that it really doesn't work on the scale. Your statement of "everyone lives more or less comfortably" is the problem. In your utopia, who selects who lives "more" comfortable and who lives "less" comfortable? I know, I will. I will live more comfortable than you. But what does more and less mean. I'll solve that too, I'll define it you can sleep in a shack with just cold water and I'll live in a castle. Yeah, I'm starting to see things more your way and I'm starting to like it.

The phrase "more or less comfortably" refers to the fact that some people will always be uncomfortable -- the mentally ill, the imprisoned, your family, that sort of thing. Comfort being a subjective matter. What can be provided objectively to all citizens are things that determine the potential for comfortable living: public healthcare (prevents plagues, to a certain extent), public education (helps prevent morlocks), and other public properties and entitlements (which work against the existence of privileged classes like the nomenklatura, the Inner Party, and the British aristocracy).

"Who selects what?" Why, what a ridiculous question to ask of an anarchist. Each selects his own comfort -- ask a Hindu ascetic and any suicidal rock star for their differing levels of comfort at radically different levels of opulence. As for the means of existence? All deserve these things equally. The oppression I oppose is the denial of these means. As for the means of luxury? I won't deny anyone those Vera Wang wedding dresses -- that'd be rather ananarchist (archist?) of me. But I can say that I believe it's immoral.

Please try to remember that Iceland as a population (307,261) smaller than Rhode Island (1,048,319). It's not exactly an Apple to Oranges comparisons.

All the more reason to break large countries into smaller countries, and unite them under some sort of United Nations thing. Corporations are not the only things that become increasingly incompetent and impossible to manage with increasing size -- governments do too.

However, China (with over 20% of the worlds population) is a Communist country with all of those great things that you want, need I go on.

China is Communist, ostensibly, but not communist. Colossal difference. I can declare my apartment to be the Glorious Dictatorial Kalisphoenixate of Myschwanzinyourear, but the people who are really in charge are the people who own the apartment complex. What we in the "reality" business like to do in such cases is evaluate whether or not something is true, and then act accordingly. In this case, we see that China has absolutely nothing to do with what I was discussing, and can then stick out our collective tongues at you and mock you with our stirring Chicken Dance.

 

[rdowns]

PR Newswire 6:18 am December 29, 2006

Apple(R) today filed its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 1, 2006 and its Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2006 with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). Both filings had been delayed pending the conclusion of an independent investigation by the special committee of the board of directors into past stock option practices and the resulting restatement of the Company's financial results. Apple undertook this investigation on its own initiative and has informed the SEC and the U.S. Attorney's Office of the results.

Based on an analysis of the findings of the independent investigation, the Company has recognized total additional non-cash stock-based compensation expense of $84 million after tax, including $4 million and $7 million in fiscal years 2006 and 2005, respectively. The restatement arises solely from certain stock option grants made between 1997 and 2002; the investigation found no grants after December 31, 2002 that required accounting adjustments.

"The special committee, its independent counsel and forensic accountants have performed an exhaustive investigation of Apple's stock option granting practices," in a joint statement said Al Gore, chair of the special committee, and Jerome York, chair of Apple's Audit and Finance Committee. "The board of directors is confident that the Company has corrected the problems that led to the restatement, and it has complete confidence in Steve Jobs and the senior management team."

 

[skunk]

Sounds pretty small beer to me. What's a few million between friends?

 

[devman]

yawn

It also gives details of the grants which were misdated.

Many, it suggests, were the result of dating options to when a compensation committee agreed them, instead of when the board signed them off.

In some cases, the discrepancy was a single day - although for many the difference in dates is not specified.

Steve Jobs' options

For Mr Jobs, Apple's founder, the investigation found that one of two grants made between 1997 and 2002 had the wrong date.

The grant of 7.5 million options was initially approved at a board meeting in August 2001. They were dated 19 October and priced at that day's share price of $18.30 - up from $17.83 at the August meeting.

In fact, they were not finalised until 18 December, by which time Apple shares were worth $21.01.

The investigation found board sign-off had been "improperly recorded" as occurring at a 19 October "special board meeting" - a meeting it said had never occurred.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6216825.stm

 

[nbs2]

Talk about forgiving! Up 4 points and we aren't even to lunch!

 

[stagi]

Back up

Stock is back up over $85 again

 

[IJ Reilly]

Talk about forgiving! Up 4 points and we aren't even to lunch!

Just another overreaction to the previous overreaction.

 

[Rocketman]

CEo's worring about towns People Please these guys worry about two things, their pocketbooks and the stockholders and no one else. I dont think Apple was giving a hoot about those chineese working 15 hr days until someone did some poking around. Dont spin corporate greed into morals. Apple is worried about one thing $$$. Corporate America doesnt worry about any town,city or state unless there is money in it for them period.

Apple had a supplier policy on this issue preceeding the controversy. They were doing the "right thing" well ahead of any law or regulation requiring it. When the controversy arose about if they were following their own VOLUNTARY policy or not, they investigated it at considerable cost.

They found a limited number of irregularities on the VOLUNTARY policy and asked their supplier to come into compliance, which they did.

It turns out the employee was so excited to get paid so much under such good conditions, they wanted to work MORE than allowed.

Apple and their suppliers are such meanies

Rocketman

 

[nbs2]

Just another overreaction to the previous overreaction.

Is it? Or is it people coming to there senses after an overreaction?

I suppose in the end it is an indictment of capitalism - no man is bigger than a company of which he is just a cog. Even if he is a big cog.

 

[Peace]

Jeez.Talk about blowing something out of proportion..

 

[MacVault]

Why would Jobs have just hired an attorney if he is innocent? Surely he would have know Apple would shortly thereafter find him to be clear of any wrongdoing. What's the attorney for now? Is it just that Apple found him clear but now maybe the SEC will find otherwise?